9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he total income of the assessee at Rs. 58, 53, 770/-. 2. First Ground of appeal deals with validity of reassessment proceedings. We find that the AO had reopened the case after recording the reasons. The reasons recorded by him read as under: (i) During the F. Y. 1999-2000 (A. Y. 2000-01) all the shares of the company were acquired by M/s. TELCO Ltd. Consequent to this, the persons beneficially holding 51% of the voting power has changed from A. Y. 2000-01. Thus, as per section 79 of the Income tax Act, the losses pertaining to A. Y. 1999-2000 and earlier years are not allowed to be c/f and set off. However, in the assessment it is seen that loss of A. Y. 1999-2000 amounting to Rs. 7, 81, 046/- was set off against the profit of current y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely change of opinion. After considering the submission of the assessee and assessment order the FAA held that in the case under consideration there was a mistake in the original assessment order, that wrong claim was allowed, that relevant details were not available during the original assessment proceedings, that the AO was justified in reopening the assessment. 4. During the course of hearing before us, the Authorised Representative (AR) referred to the reasons recorded by the AO and stated that both the issues mentioned in the reasons were dealt with extensively by the AO while passing the original order, that the assessee had supplied all the necessary details and AO had arrived at a particular conclusion, that in para 2 of the reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntenance of vehicles (Pg-42 of the PB). Vide its letter dated 28. 11. 2005, (Pg-46 of PB), the assessee had enclosed a copy of leave and license agreement, dt. 11. 10. 2002 entered into between Mini Car India Ltd. and Tata Motors Ltd. It is also found that while completing the order u/s. 143(3) of the Act, the amount of Rs. 58. 53 lakhs is not appearing anywhere. In short, the AO had reopened the assessment with regard to issues which are already dealt with during the regular assessment proceedings. After the completion of 143(3) proceedings, he formed different opinion about the treatment to be given to the two items. Thus, it was a pure case of change of opinion. We find that the FAA had mentioned that there were mistakes in the original ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, the Hon'ble High Court held as under: The assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 2005-06 was completed under section 143(3)of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer subsequently reopened the assessment on the ground that he had inadvertently failed to notice that income of the assessee from the disposal of stocks in the bonded warehouse had escaped assessment. The Tribunal held that the reopening of the assessment was invalid.... the original assessment was framed under section 143(3) of the Act and while framing original assessment, a specific query was raised by the Assessing Officer and was clarified by the assessee in writing. It was not a case where relevant material was not disclosed by the assessee in the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2001-02 to 2004-05 and the fact that subsequently for the AY. 2005-06, assessment was concluded following the mutual agreement procedure. The AO in the assessment order had specifically recorded that since the facts of the year under consideration remained the same, following the agreement reached by the respective competent authorities in the earlier years, the tax was computed at 10 % according to resolutions passed in the mutual agreement procedure. Notices of reassessment were issued in respect of both the AY. s. The assessee challenged the re-opening by filing a writ petition. Allowing the writ, the Hon'ble Court held as follow: "In CIT v. USHA INTERNATIONAL LTD. [2012] 348 ITR 485, the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court laid down t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... very same material that was already before the Assessing Officer at the time of framing of the assessments under section 143(3) of the Act and even the reasons recorded that "from the perusal of the assessment record, it is observed that". This clearly showed that the Assessing Officer had sought to re-appreciate the material that was already there at the time when the assessment was framed under section 143(3). It was clearly a case of change of opinion, which is clearly not permissible. The notices were not valid. " We find that no fresh material or information was referred to by the AO in the reasons recorded for re-opening the assessment, that the material referred to was the same, that the reasons arose from the perusal of the exist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
